DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3, 5-13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wuethrich (EP 0494397 A2) in view of Zhao (CN 203659611 U).
As to Claim 1, Wuethrich discloses:
A switchgear 1 (see Figs. 1-2), comprising:
a switchgear housing (housing of switchgear 1);
a plurality of busbars (bus bars 10,11,12) within the switchgear housing (see Figs. 1-2, 10,11,12 within housing of 1);
a plurality of disconnectors (movable contact 23) within the switchgear housing, which are arranged in a course of the busbars (11,12,13; see Par. 0010, bus bars 10-12 are connected to movable contacts 23 via conductors 13 and 19);
a disconnector housing (insulating tube 18), which is arranged within the switchgear housing 1 and encompasses at least the disconnectors 23 (Par. 0010 “The vacuum switch 15 contains three interrupters 17, each of which is housed in an insulating tube 18… “The movable contact 23 is actuated by the switch drive 16 via a drive lever 24”; 23 disposed in 18),
wherein the disconnector housing 18 has at least one bottom opening and at least one top opening (Par. 0010 “The vacuum switch 15 contains three interrupters 17, each of which is housed in an insulating tube 18 open at the top and bottom with a round or rectangular cross-section”) configured to allow an air flow from the at least one bottom opening to the at least one top opening via the disconnectors 23 (Par. 0016 “It provides the necessary air circulation for cooling the interrupters 17 by drawing air through the supply air ducts 50, the air distribution duct 40, its outlet openings 41, 42, 43 and the free cross-section between the interrupters 17 and the insulating tubes 18”; Par. 0017 “Because the outlet opening 46 is located higher than the inlet openings 51, a chimney-like effect is created, so that a cooling airflow occurs even without the help of the fan”; also see Fig. 2, airflow from beneath 18, over 23 and out of top of 18).
Wuethrich does not disclose:
a switchgear housing that is dust-tight and water-tight when submerged up to a depth of at least one meter.
However, Zhao discloses:
a switchgear housing that is dust-tight and water-tight when submerged up to a depth of at least one meter (Par. 0033 “The tank cover and the tank wall are welded as one piece, with a protection level of IP68, which maximizes the waterproof requirements and is truly maintenance-free”; Par. 0009 “This utility model discloses an energy-saving oil-immersed buried amorphous alloy transformer, which has a double-layer oil tank cover”; Applicant’s spec., Pg. 6, Lines 16-18, states that IP68 is dust-tight and water-tight when submerged up to a depth of at least one meter);
in order to provide a housing/cover that is water-proof and maintenance-free (Par. 0033).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the related art(s) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Wuethrich as further suggested by Zhao e.g., providing:
a switchgear housing that is dust-tight and water-tight when submerged up to a depth of at least one meter;
in order to provide a housing/cover that is water-proof and maintenance-free.
As to Claim 2, the obvious modification of Wuethrich in view of Zhao discloses:
wherein the at least one bottom opening comprises a first bottom opening and a second bottom opening facing downwards (see highlighted first and second bottom openings; wherein at least bottom side of opening faces downwards), and
wherein the at least one top opening comprises a first top opening and a second top opening facing upwards (see highlighted first and second top openings, wherein at least top side of opening faces upwards), and a third top opening facing downwards (see highlighted third opening, wherein at least bottom side of opening faces downwards; Wuethrich).
PNG
media_image1.png
537
404
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to Claim 3, the obvious modification of Wuethrich in view of Zhao discloses:
wherein the disconnector housing 18 has a height (see Fig. below), which is a vertical extension of the disconnector housing 18, a length (see Fig. below), which is a horizontal extension of the disconnector housing in a direction parallel to a longitudinal extension of a blade (drive lever 24) of the disconnector 23, and a width (see Fig. below), which is a horizontal extension in a direction perpendicular to the longitudinal extension of the blade 24 of the disconnector 23.
PNG
media_image2.png
526
839
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Wuethrich and Zhao do not explicitly disclose:
wherein
a total width of the first bottom opening and the second bottom opening is in a range of 0.85 to 0.95 times the width of the disconnector housing, and/or
a total length of the first bottom opening and the second bottom opening is in a range of 0.4 to 0.6 times the length of the disconnector housing, and/or
a total width of the first top opening and the second top opening is in a range of 0.85 to 0.95 times the width of the disconnector housing, and/or
a length of the first top opening plus a length of the second top opening is in a range of 0.4 to 0.6 times the length of the disconnector housing, and/or
a total length of the third top opening is in a range of 0.05 to 0.15 times the length of the disconnector housing.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide:
a total width of the first bottom opening and the second bottom opening is in a range of 0.85 to 0.95 times the width of the disconnector housing, and/or
a total length of the first bottom opening and the second bottom opening is in a range of 0.4 to 0.6 times the length of the disconnector housing, and/or
a total width of the first top opening and the second top opening is in a range of 0.85 to 0.95 times the width of the disconnector housing, and/or
a length of the first top opening plus a length of the second top opening is in a range of 0.4 to 0.6 times the length of the disconnector housing, and/or
a total length of the third top opening is in a range of 0.05 to 0.15 times the length of the disconnector housing;
in order to provide a chimney-like effect and increase cooling airflow from bottom to top within the insulating tube 18 (Par. 0017).
Further, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
It has also been held that discovering an optimum value of a result-effective variable (e.g., the relative dimensions of the disconnector housing for effecting the airflow within the housing) involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
As to Claim 5, the obvious modification of Wuethrich in view of Zhao does not explicitly disclose:
wherein a ratio between a total area of the at least one top opening and a total area of the at least one bottom opening is in a range of 0.5 to 0.7.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide:
wherein a ratio between a total area of the at least one top opening and a total area of the at least one bottom opening is in a range of 0.5 to 0.7;
in order to provide a chimney-like effect and increase cooling airflow from bottom to top within the insulating tube 18 (Par. 0017 of Wuethrich).
Further, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
It has also been held that discovering an optimum value of a result-effective variable (e.g., the relative dimensions of the disconnector housing for effecting the airflow within the housing) involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
As to Claim 6, the obvious modification of Wuethrich in view of Zhao discloses:
wherein at least one side wall (bottom side of walls of 18 of Wuethrich) of the disconnector housing 18 is inclined at an angle of at least 5° measured against a vertical line (bottom side of 18 is at least inclined more than 5° from a vertical line; Wuethrich).
As to Claim 7, the obvious modification of Wuethrich in view of Zhao discloses:
wherein the busbars (10,11,12 of Wuethrich) comprise first busbar sections arranged on top of another and running parallel to each other in their longitudinal extension (Par. 0009 “In the busbar compartment 4, the busbars 10, 11, 12 run perpendicular to the plane of the drawing in Fig. 1”; 10,11,12 are stacked and are parallel), and
second busbar sections (connecting conductors 19) arranged horizontally next to each other and running parallel to each other in their longitudinal extension (conductors 19 are arranged next to one another and are parallel; see Figs. 1-2),
wherein the longitudinal extension of the first busbar sections is oriented perpendicular to the longitudinal extension of the second busbar sections (extension of bus bars 11,12,13 is perpendicular to extension of conductors 19; 10-12 run into page of Fig. 1, wherein conductors 19 extend horizontally), and
wherein a respective one of the first busbar sections (10,11,12) is connected to a respective one of the second busbar sections 19 each one after another beginning at an end of a first busbar section of the lowest busbar of the first busbar sections (each bus bar 10,11,12 connected to conductors 19 via respective connecting conductors 13; Wuethrich).
As to Claim 8, the obvious modification of Wuethrich in view of Zhao discloses:
wherein:
the first busbar sections (10,11,12 of Wuethrich) are arranged out of the disconnector housing 18 (10,11,12 arranged outside of 18),
the second busbar sections 19 pass a wall of the disconnector housing 18 and are connected to each of the first busbar sections (10,11,12) and the disconnectors 23 (19 pass a wall of 18, see Fig. 1; 19 connected to 10,11,12 and 23 via 17), and
the disconnectors 23 are arranged horizontally next to each other and run parallel to each other in their longitudinal extension (contacts 23 are arranged horizontally next to each other and are parallel in the vertical/extension direction; Wuethrich).
As to Claim 9, the obvious modification of Wuethrich in view of Zhao discloses:
wherein vacuum interrupters (interrupter 17 of vacuum switch 15) are arranged in the disconnector housing 18 and are connected to each of the disconnectors 23 (Par. 0010 “The vacuum switch 15 contains three interrupters 17, each of which is housed in an insulating tube 18 open at the top and bottom with a round or rectangular cross-section”; 23 connected to 17),
wherein the vacuum interrupters 17 are arranged vertically next to each other and run parallel to each other in their longitudinal extension (interrupters 17 arranged horizontally next to each other and are parallel in the vertical/extension direction, and
wherein third busbar sections (connecting conductors 20) are connected to each of the vacuum interrupters 17 (Par. 0010 “The connecting conductors 19, 20 serve on the one hand to hold the interrupters 17 in the insulating tubes 18, on the other hand they connect the vacuum switching tubes with the (not shown) isolating contacts located in the feedthroughs 21, 22”; Wuethrich).
As to Claim 10, the obvious modification of Wuethrich in view of Zhao discloses:
wherein in that the disconnector housing (18 of Wuethrich) has at least one third bottom opening arranged in a region of the vacuum interrupter 17 (at least one opening in bottom of 18 is third opening, and in region of 17 of Wuethrich).
As to Claim 11, the obvious modification of Wuethrich in view of Zhao discloses:
wherein the disconnector housing (18 of Wuethrich) is made from plastic (Par. 0010 “The insulating tubes 18 are manufactured in one piece from plastic together with the frame of the switch drive 16 and also form the frame of the vacuum switch”).
As to Claim 12, the obvious modification of Wuethrich in view of Zhao discloses:
wherein the switchgear housing provides an insulation of IP68 according to ISO 20653 (Par. 0033 “The tank cover and the tank wall are welded as one piece, with a protection level of IP68, which maximizes the waterproof requirements and is truly maintenance-free”; Zhao).
As to Claim 13, the obvious modification of Wuethrich in view of Zhao discloses:
wherein an outer disconnector housing (circuit breaker room 2 of Wuethrich) encloses a plurality of disconnector housings 18 (Par. 0010 “In the circuit breaker room 2, a vacuum switch 15 is arranged”; 18 disposed in circuit breaker room 2).
As to Claim 16, the obvious modification of Wuethrich in view of Zhao discloses:
wherein the disconnector housing 18 has a height (see Fig. below), which is a vertical extension of the disconnector housing 18, a length (see Fig. below), which is a horizontal extension of the disconnector housing in a direction parallel to a longitudinal extension of a blade (drive lever 24) of the disconnector 23, and a width (see Fig. below), which is a horizontal extension in a direction perpendicular to the longitudinal extension of the blade 24 of the disconnector 23.
PNG
media_image2.png
526
839
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Wuethrich and Zhao do not explicitly disclose:
wherein:
a total width of the first bottom opening and the second bottom opening is in a range of 0.85 to 0.95 times the width of the disconnector housing, and
a total length of the first bottom opening and the second bottom opening is in a range of 0.4 to 0.6 times the length of the disconnector housing, and
a total width of the first top opening and the second top opening is in a range of 0.85 to 0.95 times the width of the disconnector housing, and
a length of the first top opening plus a length of the second top opening is in a range of 0.4 to 0.6 times the length of the disconnector housing, and
a total length of the third top opening is in a range of 0.05 to 0.15 times the length of the disconnector housing.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide:
wherein:
a total width of the first bottom opening and the second bottom opening is in a range of 0.85 to 0.95 times the width of the disconnector housing, and
a total length of the first bottom opening and the second bottom opening is in a range of 0.4 to 0.6 times the length of the disconnector housing, and
a total width of the first top opening and the second top opening is in a range of 0.85 to 0.95 times the width of the disconnector housing, and
a length of the first top opening plus a length of the second top opening is in a range of 0.4 to 0.6 times the length of the disconnector housing, and
a total length of the third top opening is in a range of 0.05 to 0.15 times the length of the disconnector housing;
in order to provide a chimney-like effect and increase cooling airflow from bottom to top within the insulating tube 18 (Par. 0017).
Further, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
It has also been held that discovering an optimum value of a result-effective variable (e.g., the relative dimensions of the disconnector housing for effecting the airflow within the housing) involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wuethrich (EP 0494397 A2) in view of Zhao (CN 203659611 U) as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Liu (CN 202276085 U).
As to Claim 14, the obvious modification of Wuethrich in view of Zhao does not disclose:
wherein the outer disconnector housing is made from metal.
However, Liu discloses:
wherein the outer disconnector housing (cabinet body 1, corresponds to housing of switchgear of Wuethrich at least enclosing a portion of 16 of Wuethrich) is made from metal (Par. 0014 “As shown in Figure 1, the fully insulated metal ring main unit includes a cabinet 1”);
in order to provide an insulated cabinet that is moisture-proof, corrosion-proof, long product life and low maintenance cost (Par. 0010).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the related art(s) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Wuethrich in view of Zhao as further suggested by Liu e.g., providing:
wherein the outer disconnector housing is made from metal;
in order to provide an insulated cabinet that is moisture-proof, corrosion-proof, long product life and low maintenance cost.
Further, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
As to Claim 15, the obvious modification of Wuethrich in view of Zhao does not disclose:
wherein the outer disconnector housing provides an insulation of IP67 according to ISO 20653.
However, Liu discloses:
wherein the outer disconnector housing 1 provides an insulation of IP67 according to ISO 20653 (Par. 0014 “This encloses all electrical components in SF6 gas, isolating them from air, preventing moisture and corrosion, improving insulation performance and lifespan, and achieving an IP67 corrosion resistance rating”);
in order to provide an insulated cabinet that is moisture-proof, corrosion-proof, long product life and low maintenance cost (Par. 0010).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the related art(s) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Wuethrich in view of Zhao as further suggested by Liu e.g., providing:
wherein the outer disconnector housing provides an insulation of IP67 according to ISO 20653;
in order to provide an insulated cabinet that is moisture-proof, corrosion-proof, long product life and low maintenance cost.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As to claim 4, the allowability resides in the overall structure and functionality of the apparatus as recited in the dependent claim 4, including all of the limitations of its base claims and intervening claims, and at least in part, because claim 4 recites the following limitations:
“wherein the third top opening faces downwards and is arranged at a distance of 0.15 to 0.25 times the height of the disconnector housing measured from the top of the disconnector housing.” – claim 4.
Sato (US 20040104201 A1) discloses insulator housings, however does not disclose the details of the claimed opening.
Corti (US 20110000771 A1) discloses casings, however only discloses one opening at the top of the casing.
Lammers (US 20060034037 A1) discloses an insulating barrier, however does not disclose the details of the claimed opening.
The aforementioned limitations in combination with all remaining limitations of claim 4, are believed to render said claim 4 and all claims dependent therefrom allowable over the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination.
Further, Examiner has not identified any double patenting issues.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW S MUIR whose telephone number is (571)270-1329. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 5 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jayprakash Gandhi can be reached at (571)272-3740. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MATTHEW SINCLAIR MUIR/Examiner, Art Unit 2835
/Jayprakash N Gandhi/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2835